“The paper’s results were published on August 8 in the renowned peer-reviewed Cureus Journal of Medical Science.”
Never heard of it. It’s not JAMA, Lancet or NE Journal.
You want to do a proper study on Ivermectin? Get yourself an array of samples who are selected to have no other factors underway, divide in half. Give half Ivermectin and nothing else. Give the other half placebo. Ensure identical age in the samples, identical locale in the sample, identical nearly everything in the sample. Then compare, and be sure you have a representative sample of the whole planet, not Peru where they had Lambda smash them but nowhere else.
Doing a study where you gather numbers from samples you did not select and may have any of 80 or so different factors involved and is not representative of the planet is just an exercise to throw red meat to some people who are largely angry about nothing.
Spoken like a true, $hot defending Gov’t plant, Owen. Can’t have any info not FRAUDci/CDC/JAMA approved, now, can we?
About Cureus
The Open Access medical journal for a new generation of doctors, researchers and patients.
We’re eliminating barriers to the generation and dissemination of medical knowledge.
The Cureus Difference
Based in San Francisco, California, Cureus is a Springer Nature journal leveraging the power of an online, crowdsourced community platform to share and promote published medical knowledge around the world.
Journal Metrics
Readership
3.4M
Monthly Reads
1.2M
Monthly Readers
Publication
33 Days
Avg. Time from Submission to Publication
51%
Acceptance Rate
1.5 Days
Avg. Time to First Decision
31%
Accepted Articles Published for Free
Not really an argument. These journals have beclowned themselves. They proved themselves to be mouthpieces of the blob.
They are veracity-free information sources.
Your western bias is showing to discount the bona fides of this medical journal from South America
“The paper’s results were published on August 8 in the renowned peer-reviewed Cureus Journal of Medical Science.”
Here’s another study of 88,000 subjects using IVM preventatively
Regular Use of Ivermectin as Prophylaxis for COVID-19 Led Up to a 92% Reduction in COVID-19 Mortality Rate in a Dose-Response Manner: Results of a Prospective Observational Study of a Strictly Controlled Population of 88,012 Subjects
I can’t speak to the value of this “study”. But JAMA, Lancet and NE Journal have thoroughly beclowned themselves in the last decade.
Outside of supervising the study myself - which I am not qualified to do - I am not inclined to place a lot of trust in any of the above. They are highly politicized.
Who can we trust anymore medically speaking? Dunno. But after the last 3 years I certainly don’t trust the corporate medical establishment.
One wonders how it is that a drug with decades worth of medical history in humans behind it, including Nobel prizes for its discovery, yet the entire medical establishment in the western world was calling it 'horse paste'. Huh, you might think that perhaps there was an agenda involved, and not actually the 'science' that was claimed.
The deep state and big pharma appreciates your support.